“The idea is to have a neutral to positive balance in chocolate specifically between cost and pricing and albeit pricing is not going to move much.”

In context

“, follow-up on the answer to Pete's first question just to make sure I fully understand kind of the message you're talking about as there are a lot of moving parts with cocoa and pricing. So when you talk about flat chocolate pricing in 2026, that's the expectation. Cocoa should be down, I think, significantly. But should we think about the net price cost relationship embedded in the guide as roughly neutral to the year? Of the inventory accounting and the, you know, the elevated hedges flowing through, or is it still a net positive? I'm just trying to kind of understand the dynamics there. And then is the idea that if pricing can kind of stabilize in 2026, cocoa resets lower in 2027. So that's really when the real profit recovery starts to show up. Luca Zaramella: Yeah. Thank you, Megan. The idea is to have a neutral to positive balance in chocolate specifically between cost and pricing and albeit pricing is not going to move much. As I said, there is an element of cost that was locked for 2026. So in general, you should think about pricing net of cost as slightly positive to neutral for chocolate. That's the way we have prepared the plan. Megan Clapp: Okay. That's super helpful. Thank you. Shep Dunlap: And then just to come back to the organic sales outlook, zero to 2%, you've got some nice momentum in emerging markets. I think finished the year around high single digits. So that the expectation for 2026 that emerging markets can kind of be on in that high single digit range. And if so, I think mathematically would imply kind of developed markets decline in the low to mid single digit range. So, you know, is that math fair and just any way to kind of think about The US versus Europe and relation to that? Luca Zaram”